Đang chuẩn bị liên kết để tải về tài liệu:
báo cáo khoa học: " Applying psychological theories to evidence-based clinical practice: identifying factors predictive of placing preventive fissure sealants"

Tuyển tập báo cáo các nghiên cứu khoa học quốc tế ngành y học dành cho các bạn tham khảo đề tài: Applying psychological theories to evidence-based clinical practice: identifying factors predictive of placing preventive fissure sealants | Bonetti et al. Implementation Science 2010 5 25 http www.implementationscience.eom content 5 1 25 IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE Implementation Science RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Applying psychological theories to evidence-based clinical practice identifying factors predictive of placing preventive fissure sealants Debbie Bonetti 1 Marie Johnston2 Jan E Clarkson1 Jeremy Grimshaw3 Nigel B Pitts1 Martin Eccles4 Nick Steen4 Ruth Thomas5 Graeme Maclennan5 Liz Glidewell6 and Anne Walker5 Abstract Background Psychological models are used to understand and predict behaviour in a wide range of settings but have not been consistently applied to health professional behaviours and the contribution of differing theories is not clear. This study explored the usefulness of a range of models to predict an evidence-based behaviour -- the placing of fissure sealants. Methods Measures were collected by postal questionnaire from a random sample of general dental practitioners GDPs in Scotland. Outcomes were behavioural simulation scenario decision-making and behavioural intention. Predictor variables were from the Theory of Planned Behaviour TPB Social Cognitive Theory SCT Common Sense Self-regulation Model CS-SRM Operant Learning Theory OLT Implementation Intention II Stage Model and knowledge a non-theoretical construct . Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the predictive value of each theoretical model individually. Significant constructs from all theories were then entered into a cross theory stepwise regression analysis to investigate their combined predictive value Results Behavioural simulation - theory level variance explained was TPB 31 SCT 29 II 7 OLT 30 . Neither CSSRM nor stage explained significant variance. In the cross theory analysis habit OLT timeline acute CS-SRM and outcome expectancy SCT entered the equation together explaining 38 of the variance. Behavioural intention -theory level variance explained was TPB 30 SCT 24 OLT 58 CS-SRM 27 . GDPs in the action